Chapter 2

Theoretical Framework
The Concept:
International relations analysts have often sought to explain the state interactions,
events and phenomena of world politics in context of various theoretical frameworks.
International theories help in developing the conceptual framework upon which states relations
can be analyzed.
Power Transition:
Organski (1958) 1 introduced power transition theory in his classic work, world
politics.2 Power transition is a hegemonic theory and a structural and vibrant approach to
international affairs. It focuses on power relationships so sometimes it is linked to realist school
of thought but unlike realist theories it focuses on the role of dominant state in managing the
status quo and de-emphasizes the role of anarchy, power transition sees global politics as a
hierarchy of nations with altering levels of cooperation and competition. There is always uneven
distribution of power among independent sovereign nations. Some nations are more powerful
than others in terms of size and level of development.
Power transition theory has three components: structure, dynamics and policy
According to power transition theory, international system is hierarchical in which domination
nation sits at the top. As Organski observes, at any given moment the single most powerful
nation on earth heads an international order which includes also some other major powers of
secondary importance and some minor nations and dependencies as well (see Figure 2-1). 3
1

A.F.K Organski, World Politics, 1958

A. F. K. Organski, World Politics. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1969, 2nd Ed.

David Lai, The United states and China in power transition (Strategic Studies
Institute,2011) p5

Figure 2-1. Structure of International Relations.4

It challenges the realist theory of balance of power which says that balance of
power is more favorable for world peace than the imbalance of power where as power transition
argues that a balance of power does not lead to peace among international powersto the
4

Ibid p,6

contrary, power parity leads to war, especially when one great power overtakes the dominant
power in the international system. Organski and Kugler (1980)5 explain that level of satisfaction
and dissatisfaction matter for the maintenance of the status quo.

If the states are satisfied with the status quo, they may ally with the dominant power for
economic and security support and normally the dissatisfied states are too weak and unable to
stand in front of dominant power but if the power of rising sate approaches that of the dominant
state then that state will initiate a war to change the status quo, so war is more likely when
challenger is dissatisfied and surpasses the dominant power or there is parity between the
dominant power and challenger.
According to power transition imbalances in power can be more conducive to peace and
power parity is dangerous. Power transition theorists mainly focus on great power conflict but it
can be applied on regional players as well. Distribution of power is uneven between the states in
any given region as it is spread unevenly across the world.
Power transition theory can be used to better understand power dynamics and the
likelihood of war in a specific region or internationally. Power transition theory requires a
scientific definition of power for its application to real world cases. The primary theorists of the
theory define power as the ability of a state to impose on or persuade another state to comply
with its will6.
Power is achieved through the combination of a states population, this populations
economic productivity, and the ability of its government to mobilize the former two effectively

A.F.K Organski, Jacek Kugler. The War Ledger, 1980

A.F.K. Organski & Jacek Kugler. The War Ledger. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1981, p. 19.

and efficiently7. Each of these three components is necessary for a state to reach great power
status, and therefore, potentially challenge the dominant power8.
Power transition mainly focuses on the satisfaction of states with the international
system because according to power transition, War occurs because of three conditions: Power
shifts, approximate equality of power and Dissatisfaction with the status quo.

Dominant powers try to maintain their hegemony and satisfied status quo by
developing such a system which is acceptable for other states. Sometimes dominant power
compromises on her hegemony and control over system for creating an environment of mutual
trust and benefit otherwise satisfied lesser powers would be skeptical or hostile to dominant
power. Satisfied states will support and dominant power will be able to maintain its status quo
peacefully rather than by persistently enforcing its will.
Approximate equality of power is dangerous and it can create instability if the rising
state is dissatisfied with the status quo established by the dominant power. Dissatisfaction can be
based on historical, ideological, religious, territorial, personal, cultural or any other issue.
Challenger will not initiate war until being stronger and has relative power to the dominant state.
Unlike Balance of power, Power transition theory explains power as a combination of
population, economic production and political power to influence the other states decision
making process. In other words power of states increases with the industrialization and with this
process states will be able to catch up the dominant state because dominant state has diffident
growth and rising state has rapid growth because of industrialization but again for taking the
initiative of war, challenger must be dissatisfied from the existing status quo established by
dominant power.
7

Ronald L. Tammen, et al. Power Transitions: Strategies for the 21st Century. New York:
Seven Bridges Press, 2000, p. 8.

https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/bitstream/handle/10822/553544/morriseyEvan.pdf?
sequence=1 Accessed on 26 February 2014

According to Christopher Layne a theorist new leading power emerges because of

differential rates of growth and it eventually leads to shift in power. The potential challenger if
dissatisfied will try for the transition into becoming the dominant state. The question arises that
will this transition will be peaceful or violent? According to a study conducted by David P.
Rapkin and Thompson, the future of such conflict is uncertain.
Power transition theory argues that rising state is more like to initiate the war with
dominant power or vise versa. According to Organski and Kugler, war will happen after the
transition but Ronald L. Tammen has different view. He suggests that rising power will take the
initiative after the point of transition.

Levy and Thompson made an argument to challenge Organskis point of view and they
state that rising state would be weaker for taking the initiative of war but it would be much
stronger to confront the dominant power after the point of transition. But then the question is
why dominant power would wait for the challenger to strike the dominant state?
If the dominant state initiates war this would be called preventive war. A preventive
war is very much different from preemptive one. The difference is that preventive war would be
initiated because of having fears of a rising opponent, shift in power by the fear that if the
challenger will become stronger, through war and coercion it will attempt to exploit its
advantage. This war is motivated by the anticipation of power shift unlike preemption because it
is not motivated by the expectation of an immediate attack.
In preemption, there is certainty that rising challenger would attack first and get the
advantage of striking first. According to preventive logic, a shift in power leads to war but if we
take examples from history, it shows us different view. For example United States of America
surpassed Britain as a global power in the 20th century and in 1930s Germany was rapidly rising
and it met with appeasement. Power shift did not lead to preventive war in both cases.

Power transition theory is completely opposite to balance of power. Each theory

focuses on different kinds and systems of power but both focus on power relationships with in
the international system. Power dynamics that each theory hypothesizes can be summarized as:
Power transition theory define power in terms of population wealth, economic productivity and
political capacity. Unlike power transition theory, balance of power focuses on military power
only. To further elaborate the difference between theories: According to Balance of power, it is
more conducive to peace and it views application of power as eliciting balancing alliances and
major wars while power transition theory states that approximate parity of power is dangerous
and leads to war and it views concentration of power in a single dominant power in the
international system as stabilizing but transition of power between the dominant power and
rising challenger can be the cause of instability in international system.

Sino-American ongoing rivalry can be explained by several theories but the purpose
of this study is to explore the power transition and the possibility of power transition in the 21st
century by viewing Sino-US competition particularly in Asia pacific region.
Real Contender: Through the lens of power transition theory
Power transition theory is very useful to understand the future of world politics and
relations of dominant states. Power shifts and the associated war and peace periods support the
central idea of power transition theory that imbalance in power maintains the world order and
peace and approximate parity in power breeds great power war.
The main question is that if one or more nations are rising at the same time then how
would a dominant nation identify the challenger? For example United States of America and
Germany both were expanding their national power and were rising spectacularly. They
surpassed Britain but why did Great Britain only singled out Germany?
In 21st century China, India and Brazil are rising simultaneously and one has to take a
resurgent Russia into account. EU is also becoming an alarming actor on the world stage and

finally Japan will also emerge as an important factor in worlds security and political affairs. The
actual question that arises is that which one of thesis rising states is a real contender?
According to power transition theory, there are two basic requirements to become a
potential challenger. These requirements are: challenger must be strongest one among secondranked nations in geographic and demographic measure and second one is that it should be
dissatisfied from the existing status quo. These two requirements make sure that the contender
has the will and capacity to change the existing status quo established by dominant power.
The term dissatisfaction is subjective. Organski also provided the two objective ways
to deal with the subjective term of dissatisfaction. First one is that dissatisfied challenger is not
an ally of the dominant state. Second one is that challenger is not satisfied with the existing
world order and finds this system against its own interests and its has no part in creating the

existing world order so if it becomes more powerful, it will make an effort to change it according
to its own interests9.
Brazil, Russia, India and China are the second-ranked nations and they came to the
spotlight of world attention when a report entitled Dreaming with BRICs: The path of 2050
published. This study was by the American Gold men Sachs Group, Inc. According to the report,
these four countries occupy more than of the worlds landmass, consist of 40 percent of the
worlds population and they are experiencing high rapid economic growth 10. Economies of G7
countries (US, Germany, Japan, UK, France, Italy, and Canada) could be eclipsed by the
combined economies of BRICs.
Now the question is that which one of these four countries is a real contender for the
next dominant power or will the BRICs collectively rule the world? Indeed the heads of BRICs
9

David Lai, The United states and China in power transition (Strategic Studies
Institute,2011) p 18
10

Ibid p 20

have issued a declaration for the establishment of multi polar world order during their first
summit in Yekaterinburg, Russia on June 16, 200911. They focused on issues like climate change
and global financial system in their second summit held in Brazil in April, 2010. BRICs foreign
ministers have been meeting annually since 2006. Heads of central bank and financial ministers
also have held frequent meetings12.
To disqualify Russia and exclude India and Brazil as the serious contenders of worlds
next dominant power, there are many good reasons.
Russia:
There is no doubt that Russia is dissatisfied second-ranked nation and after losing the cold
war, US and western countries have not been able to transform Russia into great supporter and

genuine friend. Russias transition from communism into democracy is still questionable. US and
west still have fears over resurgent Russia and this apprehension is a key factor in the US- led
drive repeated North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Russia is not happy with this kind of
treatment by US and western countries and it is determined to and sooner or later, she will
restore her great power status. Although Russia will be alarming power for dominant power but
still she can no longer be a challenger for world leadership. With soviet style communism,
Russia has no political, economic or cultural substitutes to offer the world.13
India:

11

Tony Halpin, Brazil, Russia, India and China Form Bloc to Challenge US
Dominance, The Times, June 17, 2009 Available at
www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6514737.ece.
Accessed on 13 December 2013
12

David Lai, The United states and China in power transition (Strategic Studies
Institute,2011) p 21

Next state is India. Whether India would be a strong challenger for the next world
leader? Although, Jawaharlal Nehru ,founder of contemporary India claimed that India must be
a sound great power or disappear14 but it will not be a contender for worlds next leader because
it is facing many ethnic and religious issues within the state and the main obstacle is its rivalry
with its

separate-at-birth brother, Pakistan. The major rival of India is China. They are

immediate neighbors and natural enemies. India needs strong partners like US, Russia and Japan
to counterbalance China. In the same case, US also need India in dealing with China Problem. As
Fareed Zikriya states that India will be a check on Chinas rising ambitions and a natural ally of
United States of America.15India has problem with China, it is a bilateral issue but issues
between China and US have global impact. So we can say that India is not a contender for the
worlds next leader because enemys enemy is friend so India is an ally of US.
Brazil:
Brazil is a satisfied second-ranked power. It is a country with the abundance of natural
resources, controllable population as compare to its fellow states India and China, free of
territorial disputes and a running political and economic system.

This country has everything to become a dominant power of South America and its rise
challenges the US position. But it has no intention to challenge the US to become the worlds
dominant power although its rise decreases the US influence globally. Brazil is the member of
Organization of American States. Brazil wants to develop more as one of the second-ranked state
but does not want to overtake the US. 16

13

recent analysis of Russia as a mediocre power by John W. Parker, Russias

Revival: Ambitions, Limitations, and Opportunities for the United States, The
National Defense University Institute for National Strategic Studies, Strategic
Perspective, Vol. 3, January 2011.
14

Jawaharlal Nehru, the Discovery of India, New York: The John Day Company, 1946.

15

Fareed Zakaria, The Prize Is India, Newsweek, November 30, 2009.

US has much more interest in other parts of the world so it has good reasons to accept
Brazils rise and promotes it as an important stakeholder and can help to maintain peace and
stability in the southern part of western hemisphere.
China:
Now we can say that the only possible contender is China. We have many reasons to
say that china is a well qualified contender. It has political, economic and cultural alternatives to
offer the world. With the rapid growth, China has changed its status from a regional power to
formidable global power. China has such a big power potential that is greater than all the other
second-ranked major powers. China is a dissatisfied second ranked nation. China is not an ally of
US and has not played any role in establishing the current world order.
Chinas Economic Outlook:
Chinas journey to progress starts with Deng Xiaopings four point modernization
policy in 1978. The Chinese Communist Party adopted the export oriented policy of Japan, South
Korea Hong Kong and Singapore and soon emerged as a factory of world. China started to make
consumer products by the mid 1990s and since then, China sustains its economic growth with
approximately a double figure growth rate17. It has not only showed a remarkable growth rate, it
is also driving world economies around the world. Economic policy of China has become a
source of inspiration for other developing countries. It has brought a revolution of exports.

16

Ministry of Defense, Federative Republic of Brazil, National Strategy of Defense,

December 18, 2008, p. 8.
17

Deng Xiaopings Economic Reforms, Facts and Details, March 2012, Available at
http://factsanddetails.com/china.php?itemid=79#,www.golsearch.com/?babsrc=NT_lcl
Accessed on 10 December 2013

There is hardly any country in the world where one cannot find any product having a
stamp of made in china. Its economy lifted approximately lifted 400 million people above the
poverty line with in 25 years. China has become the second largest economy and its trade with its
neighboring countries has been surprisingly increased. From last many decades, China is a
record-holder country of most foreign direct investment (FDI).18
Hongkong and shanghai banking cooperation estimated that bank assets in China will
surpass those in the United States in 2034, while Goldman Sachs estimates that Chinas GDP
will surpass that of the United States by 204519. Robert Fogel, a Nobel laureate in economics
predicts that Chinas economy will reach $123 trillion by 2040. All this growth is because of
giving favorable conditions created through economic reforms and implementation of wellplanned strategy by Chinas government.
Chinas Military Modernization:
According to defensive realists, A country will upgrade its military so that its reaches
the point of parity or at least near-parity with its immediate rival. . In other words, a state strives
to attain minimum credible deterrence with the purpose to create a theatre denial capability. So
along with the economic progress, China is modernizing its military.
Chinas defense budget is set at $117 billion for 2013-2014. 20 This figure varies
between $114 to $117 billion in different sources. This suggests that on average, Chinas defense
18

The Chinese Economy, Economy Watch, 30 June 2010, Available at

http://www.economywatch.com/world_economy/china/?page=full Accessed on 10 December
2013

19

Keith Bradsher, The Two Faces of China: Producer and Consumer, New York
Times, December 6, 2004, adopted from David C. Kang, China Rising: Peace, Power
and Order in East Asia, (New York: Columbia University Press).
20

Chinas Defence Budget to Grow 10.7 pct in 2013: Spokesman, Fu Ying, March 5,
2012, adopted from Mandip Singh, China's Defence Budget 2013-2014: An
Analysis, March 18, 2013, IDSA Issue Brief, Available at
http://www.idsa.in/idsacomments/ChinasDefenceBudget2013-14_msingh_180313
accessed on February 9, 2014.

budget increased by 10.7 percent over 2012 which was $106.4 billion. While this may seem
unusually high, it is in fact just 1.3 percent of Chinas GDP; a marginal increase from 1.28 per

cent in 2012, but below the 1.33 per cent registered in 2008 21 much lesser than what the US
allocates for its own defense budget. Most Chinese analysts defend its continued double digit
growth in defense budget by stating that China is a vast country with a large coastline, vast land,
four nuclear neighbors and the fours disputed areas in its proximity. Therefore, Chinas defense
spending is in accordance with its need to defend the mainland.
China has assured its security and territorial integrity by having the large military in
the world. After US and Russia, China is the third one who sent astronauts in space. In terms of
hard power, China is developing fighter jets and small arms. Initially China was depending on
home-made technology but in post Gulf war to strengthening strategic alliance with Russia,
China purchased sophisticated weapons from Russia22.
China is also expanding its cultural influence. It is promoting education all over the
world and strengthening its multilateral alliances. The Confucius teachings have promoted in the
neighboring regions through development of Confucius Institutes in Europe, Africa, Asia and
North America. End of bipolarity and economic growth are the most significant reasons of
Chinas rise. This rise has become an important topic of debate in the post 9/11 era. The question
now is how China manages its rise and the power transition with the United States?
US-China power transition:
21

22

ibid

Rajan Menon, The China-Russia Relationship: What it Involves, Where it is Headed and
How it Matters for the US, The Century Foundation (2009): 16-20, Available at
http://72.32.39.237:8080/Plone/publications/pdfs/pb690/Menon.pdf accessed on 10
December 2013.

In contemporary international issues, Sino-US power transition process is on top of all issues, on
which future of international relations is based. Both countries are engaged in power transition
and both countries are willing to blaze a new path out of deadly contest for peaceful future but
history of power transition is full of bloodshed. Although United States and China have good
intentions for peaceful future but both countries have many debatable and unsettled issues and if

not managed properly then both countries can be engaged in an unwanted war against each other.
Next 30 years are very important for chinas development and evolution of US-China power
transition. According to Organski, power transition is a long process and it takes time to
complete.23 For instance, in almost 70 years, Germany caught up with Great Britain. The
transition of power from Britain to United States also took more than a century 24. From last 30
years, conditions of another power transition are also taking place and it will take another 30
years for building a new world order so next 30 years are more crucial for Sino-US relations.
We cant predict with certainty what the future will bring, but we can be certain about
the issues that will define our times. And we also know this: The relationship between the United
States and China will shape the 21st century . . . (President Barack Obama)25
This is quite a calculated statement of the US-China relationship. President is admitting that now
United States is not a sole power to shape the world. China has emerged as a global player in world politics so
they have to invite China to help with the mission.

23

David Lai, The United states and China in power transition (Strategic Studies
Institute,2011) p 17
24

25

ibid

Opening remarks by President Barack Obama at the first U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue,
Washington, DC, July 27, 2009. Available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-bythe-President-at-the-US/China-Strategic-and-Economic-Dialogue accessed on December 30th 2013

Interestingly United States is responsible for Chinas initial changes. About 40 years
ago, President Richard Nixon visited China and brought China out of its self imposed seclusion.
America helped Chinas economic development by providing it access to USs and worldwide
markets and business investments in China.
America adopted this engagement policy for many reasons. First reason was to
eliminate hatred factor between the two nations because both countries remained enemies for a
long time period and US did not recognize China after the independence for 30 years26.

Second one was because of rivalry with Soviet Union; US supported China to create
strategic balance in the region. The third one was a long term goal. US expected that political
regime would be changed because of economic development and after transforming into a
democratic state, it would become an ally of US rather than an enemy.
This engagement strategy served US interests until cold war ended because in spite of
heavy pressure for political change from US, China continued communist rule. As the result of
this end of cold war, ideological divide had restored between the two nations and this change
affected Chinas rise. China and US conflict came on surface in Taiwan Strait crisis of 1995-96
when Taiwan held its first presidential election and the major motive was to get independence
from mainland China. China fired missiles near Taiwan to prevent Taiwans pro-independence
forces. US has been involved in China-Taiwan dispute since its beginning in 1949. US supported
Taiwan and made some commitments to defense Taiwan through treaties, e.g. Mutual Defence
Treaty of 1954 and Taiwan Relations Act of 1979. US invoked two of these commitments made
in Taiwan Relations Act by sending two aircrafts carrier battle groups to the troubled waters 27. It
26

27

Fairbank and Goldman, China, pp. 217-218.

David Lai, The United states and China in power transition (Strategic Studies
Institute,2011) p 52

was the largest show of combat US combat forces in the western pacific since the end of World
War II. Although the crisis ended but its consequences continued to affect US-China relations.
China threat debate quickly emerged when signs of power transition between China
and US came to the surface and the most significant was Chinas economic growth. This debate
dominated US and western discussion of world politics. China rising and China threat
quickly became synonymic buzzwords in the US media, academic and policy circles.
The tragedy of great power politics by John J. Mearsheimer is an interesting work
about China threat. He provided a theoretical explanation. International system is anarchical and
the most important need of states is survival. For survival, states need to maximize their national
power. Great powers in any particular region have more needs because they want to be strongest
in their own region and then of course they strive to create the global hegemony.

The need of power has no end. No regional hegemon wants to see other great powers
dominate other regions. The struggle for global hegemony initiates the great power competition.
There are two common things which states do to win. First thing is to increase their own national
power and second is to do every possible thing to undermine the development of other great
powers.28 Following this logic, Mearsheimer argued that China has become a regional power so
China would try to push US out of Asia to dominate the region as US dominates the western
hemisphere and US will do everything to prevent China from gaining hegemonic status in Asia.29

28

See Mearsheimers writings, The Future of the American Pacifier, Foreign Affairs,
September/October 2001; Clash of the Titans: (Debate between Zbigniew
Brzezinski and John J. Mearsheimer), Foreign Policy, January/February 2005; and
Chinas Unpeaceful Rise, Current History, April 2006.
29

ibid